Talk:Europe
Did they ever mention that Germany and the U.K. were in Europe? I know we had that huge debacal over the China page a while back. Even though it goes with the rules, "Europe was continent on Earth" sounds really wierd too.--CWY2190 23:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC) : Germany for sure. In the first episode, Mason says, "We think the shooter's European, probably German." As for the others, I can't remember for sure. I'm not opposed to removing it, as I was merely cutting corners. And yeah, the past tense does sound weird, but it's to remain consistent with the rest of the site. --Proudhug 00:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC) :: Why again do we do that? It does sound really weird to use past tense with people who are alive and places that exist. People show up all the time and "correct the mistake" because it doesn't make sense. I don't see the purpose of it at all. --StBacchus 05:23, 17 November 2006 (UTC) : As I said, the purpose is for consistency. The idea is that the narrative perspective for IU articles be from an infinite point in the future. I could see maybe making exceptions for locations and things that are long lasting, such as continents and cities to erase the "weirdness," however. The problems arise when you try to use present tense for characters, as one often doesn't knows when, or even if, someone died. I figure it makes a nice consistency for the whole site to carry the rule over for all IU articles. --Proudhug 05:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC) :: Also, if a character dies, it's a bitch to re-write the entire article in the past tense. --24 Administration 18:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC) ::: No, the rest of the article would already be in the past tense, because it's a description of things that already happened. All that would change would be the intro paragraph: "Kim Bauer IS the daughter of Jack Bauer. After dropping out of high school, she worked as an au pair before joining CTU as an analyst. Blah blah blah." If the character dies, the article has to be updated anyway. ::: I finally understand why Memory Alpha came up with that "Archivist" fiction. Star Trek happens in the future. If they're writing from their own (year 2006) point of view, the things on Star Trek haven't happened yet. So, they can either force people to write in future tense, or they can make up a story for why they write future events in past tense. ::: 24 isn't set in the 23rd century. Here, Memory Alpha's convention causes more problems than it solves. I'm not saying we should write IU articles entirely in present tense. The things on 24 have happened, so it's not weird at all to refer to past events in past tense. I think you'll find that most articles would stay 99% the same if you dropped the "infinite point in the future" POV, and it would be less of a headache for everyone. Take a look at the modifications I made to Europe and tell me what you think. --StBacchus 04:34, 18 November 2006 (UTC) : I'm pretty sure we've had this discussion before, but 24 does take place in the future. No matter when you decide that season 1 took place, season 5 definitely happened well after 2006. So the issue isn't really different from Memory Alpha, anyway. I think we also discussed the issue of those pesky "Unknown" characters, and characters who haven't been seen for a long time. Sarah Gavin didn't die, yet her page would have to be updated after season 4 to say that she "worked" at CTU, rather than "works" at CTU. Was Mitch Anderson a terrorist, or is he a terrorist? There are lots of situations where the tense would have to be changed, and even more where we'd have no idea. It saves a heck of a lot of time and effort to keep everything in the past tense. However, as I said, I'm all for compromizing for long-lasting items like Europe and Utah. --Proudhug 05:25, 18 November 2006 (UTC) The show takes place "now," but that's not the point. The point here is that we should not be writing things that are confusing to read because it's easier for us. That's just lazy. Kim Bauer IS Jack Bauer's daughter, and until she's dead, people are going to assume the use of past tense is a mistake and correct it. If the readers get confused, the article is not written properly. Nobody should have to read the Manual of Style to understand why we've implied that Kim is dead. The articles should stand on their own. Consistency is good, but it doesn't matter as much as writing a reference that is clear and easy to read. Sarah Gavin is entirely clear. She "worked" at CTU past tense because Michelle fired her. As for the sticky situations, the less clear a character's status is, the less the tense matters. As long as the tense is consistent within the article, it's fine. --StBacchus 20:42, 20 November 2006 (UTC)